malafide action of the Respondent, the present auction notice may be quashed. 5. Per contra , Ld. Senior Counsel for the Respondent strongly objected to the present IA and contends that this is another attempt of the Applicants to frustrate the recovery of the Respondent FI. He also contends that the Applicants vide letter dated 15.11.2023 has informed to the Respondent that there is a buyer who is ready to pay Rs.81 crores however, the Applicants did not further provide the details of the said buyer. He submits that in the said letter, the Applicants themselves stated that Rs.81 crores is the adequate value of the property in question and in case the said contention of the Applicants would be taken then the said adequate value would be a fair market value and now the property in question is put for an amount of Rs.75.09 crores and two bidders have already shown their interest in the property in question. He also contends that the property in question was put for auction for 4 (four) times earlier, however, no bids received therefore, as per the practice, now the property in question is put for auction with a reserve price of Rs.75.09 crores. Thus, he submits that the
